MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Treatment of children with “ordinary” epilepsy

2000· article· en· W2166286926 on OpenAlex
Peter Camfield, Carol Camfield

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEpileptic Disorders · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsGrace (Canada)Dalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyMedicineAsymptomaticPediatricsIntensive care medicinePsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many children with epilepsy have a relatively benign clinical course with eventual remission of their seizures and no further need for medication. It is not easy to be sure who these children are at the time of diagnosis, but they do not have catastrophic epilepsy. Epilepsy is best defined as two unprovoked seizures. Not all of these children require treatment and treatment is motivated by fear of brain damage, injury, death, kindling of additional seizures, and social consequences. None of these fears provides an absolute indication for treatment. The decision to start medication should be considered on an individual basis. The choice of a first AED is arbitrary with most AEDs having equal efficacy. Follow-up schedules have not been well studied. However, there is fairly convincing evidence that routine blood and urine screening for toxicity is of no benefit, if the child is asymptomatic. Serum drug levels are of little clear benefit. Once the child has been seizure-free for 6 months to 12 months, it is reasonable to consider stopping medication. Only rarely does seizure control fail to return if there are recurrences without medication.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it